We performed a comparison between IBM Integration Bus and Red Hat Fuse based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two ESB (Enterprise Service Bus) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."We use IBM Integration Bus for document conversions."
"The solution addresses all of our middleware needs in respect of transformation, parsing, security and stability; everything really."
"The stability is mostly pretty good."
"The most valuable thing is the loose coupling and making the change in only one stack of the ESB layer or the middleware layer."
"The multi-approach and the multi-capabilities are valuable."
"IBM Integration Bus' most valuable features are its performance, fast and easy development, and easy support."
"The most valuable feature is the security."
"The product helps efficiently work with different connectors from different back-end systems."
"This solution's adaptability to our use case has helped us integrate our systems seamlessly."
"The features I found most valuable in Red Hat Fuse are the OSB framework, containerization, and the integration of Apache technologies such as the NQ channel, CXF, etc. These are the features that are very prominent in the solution. Red Hat Fuse also offers flexibility, so it's another valuable characteristic of the solution."
"Because we have been doing Red Hat Fuse projects for three years, and over time we have matured, we can employ similar use cases and make use of accelerators or templates. It gives us an edge when we deliver these services or APIs quickly."
"The most valuable feature is that it's the same as Apache Camel."
"The initial setup process is quite straightforward."
"More than a feature, I would say that the reliability of the platform is the most valuable aspect."
"The most valuable part of Fuse is the fact that it's based on Red Hat Apache Camel. It is really good that it already comes with so many different connectors. That makes it relatively easy to use. We use their XML definition to define the routes, making it really easy to define the routing."
"The solution is stable. We have gone for months or years without any issue. There are no memory restarts, so from my point of view, it's very stable."
"Sometimes migration takes too long."
"The next versions are moving toward container use. It would be a shame to make the product highly complex just to support one pattern of deployment. It is my hope that IBM continues to focus on practical functionality that is simple and cost-effective."
"IBM Integration Bus could be easier to manage, but this is true of all vendors. It doesn't always do what it says on the box."
"I would like to be able to build an Integration Bus cluster that is active-active."
"The product lacks an integrated testing module."
"The tracing and debugging features are not up to date with more modern technology available."
"The solution could improve by having built-in implementation and secure monitoring without the need for API Connect."
"The solution needs to simplify its documentation, such as the user and operation manuals, to make them even easier to understand."
"The solution will be discontinued in 2024."
"What needs to be improved in Red Hat Fuse is on the development side because when you use it for development purposes, it lacks a user interface compared to what MuleSoft has, so it's a bit difficult for users."
"The testing part, specifically when running it in the cloud, could be improved. It's a little bit complex, especially considering its cloud nature."
"My company doesn't have any experience with other messaging tools, so it's difficult to mention what areas could be improved in Red Hat Fuse, but it could be pricing because I find it expensive."
"While it's a good platform, the pricing is a bit high."
"I don't know the product last versions. I know they are migrating a microservices concepts. We still didn't get there... but we are in the process."
"Red Hat is not easy to learn. You can learn it but you sometimes need external expertise to implement solutions."
"The web tools need to be updated."
IBM Integration Bus is ranked 1st in ESB (Enterprise Service Bus) with 20 reviews while Red Hat Fuse is ranked 4th in ESB (Enterprise Service Bus) with 14 reviews. IBM Integration Bus is rated 8.0, while Red Hat Fuse is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of IBM Integration Bus writes "A reliable solution with excellent support infrastructure". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Red Hat Fuse writes "Configurable, doesn't require much coding, and has an automatic load balancing feature, but its development features need improvement". IBM Integration Bus is most compared with Mule ESB, IBM WebSphere Message Broker, Oracle Service Bus, webMethods Integration Server and TIBCO ActiveMatrix Service Bus, whereas Red Hat Fuse is most compared with Mule ESB, Oracle Service Bus, WSO2 Enterprise Integrator, webMethods Integration Server and JBoss ESB. See our IBM Integration Bus vs. Red Hat Fuse report.
See our list of best ESB (Enterprise Service Bus) vendors.
We monitor all ESB (Enterprise Service Bus) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.